Fransciscan Friars in NYC Post Instructional Video Condoning Homosexual Union

Two homosexuals appear holding hands, 10 seconds into the following video by Fr. Daniel P. Horan, OFM  –>

Image_10s_Into_Fr_Daniel_P_ Horan_OFM_Video

If this was a secular video, made by a private or non profit entity that did not believe homosexual acts were sinful, it would be fine. But this video was made by the Roman Catholic Church. The very church who preaches that any sexual act outside of sacramental marriage (male + female) is a gravely disordered action, and is sinful.

All Roman Catholics concerned about the current evil and decay that’s emanating out from within the Church must contact them to express concern (direct contact information for the particular province that manages Fr. Daniel P. Horan is listed below)

Please feel free to copy and use the letter below, or you can add to it, subtract from it or even write your own.

You can also download it as a PDF here LetterToOFMProvincialHead to print, sign, and send.

The address on where to send it via postal mail, fax, or email is further down this page. You can also call them and speak to them directly to express concern as we have included their telephone number too.

Dear OFM Provincial Head:

I am extremely concerned that you have someone in your ranks who is trying to communicate a very dangerous message to the world and to other Roman Catholics.

10 seconds into the video by Fr. Daniel P. Horan ( two homosexuals appear holding hands in what some would call an irregular union, others would call it just plain sinful.

This is deeply concerning to me as it subtly communicates and sends a message to the world that sin is not something Catholics or anyone really needs to be concerned about. The fact that this homosexual imagery is shown in a Roman Catholic video falsely sends a message of acceptance of and permission to commit the act of homosexual unity. It is exactly the kind of message, due to its subtle yet highly effective impact on the human conscious and subconscious mind, that Satan himself would want the Church to send.

It is a message that empowers the false teachings of the devil and diminishes the truth of Jesus Christ, sort of like nailing Christ to the cross again, because of what he teaches.

After receiving this loud and clear message you subtly sent through the video, the next question one would naturally ask is “Why only show one type of irregular Union? Isn’t that discrimination against those united through adultery, premarital sex, group sex, thievery, the commission of abortion, or even murder?”

I mean if sin is ok, and being united in acts of sin is not wrong, as your portrayal of the homosexual Union communicates, then all sin must be ok no matter how sinful it is, right?

That’s what your video communicates.

Is that the kind of message you believe Jesus Christ wants you to send?

You might want to make sure whoever made that video is prevented from instructing or teaching others about the faith. Their teaching skills appear to be acting in service of darkness. The message subtly conveyed through that video is that sin doesn’t exist. That is message has the potential to lead many souls directly into hell – exactly what the devil himself would want.

You need to clean your house lest it continue to work against The Lord our God and his Son Jesus Christ.

I shall keep you in my prayers. May God help you.


<name here>

Here is where to send, fax, or email your letter:

The Order of Friars Minor of the Province of the Most Holy Name

Provincial Office
129 West 31st St., 2nd Fl
New York, NY 10001-3403

Phone: (646) 473-0265
Fax: (646) 201-9620

Vocation Office
129 West 31st St., 2nd Fl
New York, NY 10001-3403

Phone: (646) 473-0265
800 #: (800) 677-7788
Fax: (800) 793-7649

Communications Office
129 West 31st St., 2nd Fl
New York, NY 10001-3403
Phone: (646) 473-0265 ext. 321
Fax: (888) 741-1045

129 West 31st St., 2nd Fl
New York, NY 10001-3403

Phone: (646) 473-0265
Fax: (646) 201-9620


Sometimes A Good Cook May Be All That Stands Between Us And Tyranny

Tim Cook is absolutely right in trying to prevent the government from compelling Apple to assist in cracking the iPhone that was issued to Syed Rizwan Farook by San Bernardino County.

This explains why:

San Bernardino County had the responsibility to manage their phones via a centrally controlled management environment so that San Bernardino County could lock, save, manage, change the password, transfer data, etc.

San Bernardino County made the decision to abdicate that responsibility. That fault rests squarely on San Bernardino County.

Since San Bernardino County failed the people its supposed to serve, the story should end there. The phone is inaccessible due to failed governance of San Bernardino County.

There were also several other opportunities to gain access to the phone, that the FBI squandered. One example is that the County of San Bernardino did know the password of Syed Rizwan Farook’s iCloud account, and because they knew that they gave it to the FBI when asked and FBI changed the iCloud password, before the iPhone automatically backed up. If that password wasn’t changed, the FBI could have connected the phone to a known WIFI connextion that the phone was prevoously clnnected to, so that the iCloud backup would have automaticlaly run, then the FBI could have gotten the all the data off of iCloud via the backup.

So before we start, lets place responsibility for this issue on both San Bernardino County and the FBI. If those two agencies didn’t act so irresponsibly, we never would be in a situation where the FBI is ordering Apple to help them break into the iPhone.

Now, in the situation of this iPhone, the FBI is not trying to solve a crime. Their actions are not part of normal “evidence gathering” in an attempt to implicate a suspect and prove a particular suspect was the person who committed the crime.

The suspect is already dead and has already forensically admitted to committing the crime.

So if what the FBI wants to do with the phone is not part of the normal process of gathering evidence to prove a particular suspect committed a crime, then what is it?

This act, the desire of the FBI to hack this iPhone, is akin to running an Intelligence Operation.

An Intelligence Operation is substantively, structurally, and categorically different than a Criminal Investigation.

In a Criminal Investigation, law enforcement is tasked with collecting evidence in order to prove that a suspect committed a crime.

In an Intelligence Operation, law enforcement is tasked with going out into the world and looking at whatever they want to look at (within the law) to see if they can figure out who is bad and who they might want to take a closer look at. In an Intelligence Operation, you are not necessarily tasked with solving any particular crime, you are only tasked with gathering as much information about whatever you can. Sort of like the NSA when it’s stated mission was to “Collect All Data”.

We already know the suspect, Syed Rizwan Farook, committed the crime. That closes the case and stops the criminal investigation. The suspect is dead, and both forensic evidence and all the witnesses universally name him as the perpetrator. This means the crime has been solved, and the FBI must now go on to the next case.

It also begs the question of why is the FBI is trying to do is something outside of and above its crime solving process. Other agencies have intelligence gathering roles. The roles are separate. One agency has a crime fighting role, and another agency has an intelligence collection role. So, why is the crime fighting agency trying to insert itself into an intelligence gathering role? If anything it should be the agency whose role is intelligence collection that is making the case for the iPhone. But since that other agency has no legal way to walk into a courtroom and say “we want to look at this iPhone because we want to know who he talks to” – because the judge would laugh them out of the courtroom, that other agency has asked their friends in the FBI to use this case as the entry point to Intelligence Collection. See what happened?

The government wants to see who else may have associated with Syed Rizwan Farook, similar to how it wanted to know who Al Capone and other criminals and terrorists of by gone era’s associated and interacted with. Such a desire on the part of the government is a very noble goal and they should pursue that goal within the power limiting framework that is already in place. They should not be allowed by a judge to break through that framework. Congress needs to pass a law and the president must sign it, if America wants to change that framework. Using an unelected judge to make laws from the bench against the will of the people is something the government keeps using to take more and more power. The way the FBI is trying to do it is patently wrong and Apple is correct in its opposition.

In a free society the goal of wanting to know who speaks and meets with whom must be balanced with the right of citizens to protect themselves from government intrusion.

Consider this:

In the 1980’s and 90’s most criminals and terrorists used code words and pay phones. They also used in-person meetings at secret locations and often communicated with letters that would then be burned upon receipt.

How could the government read the letters that were already ashes?

How could they see who attended secret meetings when there were no video cameras on street corners, and they didn’t even know the location of the meeting?

How could the government listen to the calls that were made to and from random pay phones, unless they targeted a specific individual, and followed them to listen in?

They could not, and that’s the point.

Without hacking this iPhone, the FBI is no worse off than it has been for the past 60+ years.

However, once they compel Apple to open this up, the FBI just expanded their reach in unprecedented ways that exponentially grows their surveillance and intelligence collection capabilities.

Unless the government specifically obtained a warrant in advance to tap a specific pay phone, they would never be able to determine what was said or who called whom and when.

Unless the government specifically targeted a specific person for investigation in advance, nobody would be able to observe in person meetings at secret locations, nor would the FBI be able to read letters that have already been burned to ashes.

So then, where does the iPhone fit into all this? How should we understand it?

The correct way to interpret and understand the iPhone used by Syed Rizwan Farook, is to interpret it as being no different than any of those things: (1) un-wiretapped pay phone, (2) or an in-person secret meeting with no witnesses, (3) or a pile of ashes that was at one time a secret letter.  

The FBI never had that information. Just because the information exists or existed, does not give the FBI the right to collect it.

Interaction by the FBI with the iPhone outside of the traditional criminal investigative framework described above, expands government power exponentially into an Intelligence Operation. It’s completely different and separate and must be treated as such.

Now, many say that whatever tool Apple creates, would just be used on this one iPhone.

Anyone who understands anything about technology knows that is not true. Once such a tool exists, it could very easily be used on any iPhone. There is no technical reason or legal reason that it would not be. Technically, all the FBI or Apple would need to do is make a small change to the program’s source code, and it would work on a different iPhone or any phone. Criminals would eventually get their hands on it and would modify it to work on any iPhone.

But, rather than focusing on these nuances, lets return to the real issue.

Why is the FBI trying to run an Intelligence Operation?

Why is it not satisfied with its law enforcement role?

If the FBI is allowed to get its way and run an Intelligence Operation on this iPhone today, what is the next power it will want and get tomorrow?

Where does that power end?

Who will end it?

How do we really know that?

As long as the people and lawmakers continue to allow the government to use Judges to legislate from the bench, the government will always be able to do whatever it wants.


The Ted Cruz Campaign Told the Truth about Ben Carson

CNN Reporter Chris Moody tweeted this right before the Iowa caucuses began.

This tweet by CNN’s Chris Moody clearly says Carson is leaving the campaign trail because he is not going to either of next two primary locations, which is New Hampshire followed by South Carolina.

Every candidate goes to each primary location to campaign and fight for votes.

This Chris Moody tweet, which went out right before the Iowa caucuses began, clearly implies that Carson is dropping out.

It’s the kind of tweet that goes out “ahead of official news” by newsroom insiders and happens all the time.

How America’s Fake Poor Live Better than its Middle Class

In America, one person can eat for $62.00 per month as shown in the Elon Musk challenge (click here). However, the US food stamp program called SNAP currently pays an impoverished person an average of $125.35 per person per month for food.

Impoverished means you earn less than a certain amount of money in accordance with this chart.

As long as you earn in accordance with that chart, you qualify for free food. You also get free housing, free medical, free utilities, free smartphones, free internet, and a ton of other free stuff paid for by money America borrows from China and takes from its own citizens via taxes. It’s unsustainable.

However, the $125.35 you get for food, (in addition to housing, gas, medical, and all the other free things you get as a “poor person” in America) is more than double the $62 that has already been proven to be more than sufficient amount for food via the Elon Musk challenge.

This means welfare and state food subsidy payments are far too high.

Double payments are also occurring under the flawed food stamp snap benefit because children get free meals in school plus they still get the food stamps so it’s a double dip kind of payment.

For example children of impoverished families receive free breakfast and free lunch at school Monday thru Friday 365 days a year (yes even in the summer in most schools) yet each child plus the parents still receive $125 per month per person in food stamps. A house with 4 kids could get over $800 per month just in food stamps and because the kids eat free in school $500 is left over to sell or trade for luxuries since housing and other necessities are already provided free.

Could this be one of the reasons why many of those children wear $125/pair of Nike Air Jordan shoes?

Could this be why their homes have several big screen televisions?

Might this be why people receiving food stamps and are defined as impoverished always seem to have the latest iPhones, iPods, and iPads?

The people recieving these benefits live better and have more luxuries than most middle class folks who work 80 hours a week and can never get ahead.

Many people have witnessed food stamp recipients selling access to their SNAP cards so for $1.25 in cash per $2.00 food stamp. Meaning a food stamp recipient offers to go with a non food stamp person to the grocery store and let them do their shopping for cheap via their SNAP card if that person pays them anywhere from $0.50 to $1.25 in cash for each block of $2.00 food stamps.

That means the seller is illegally selling food stamps they clearly don’t need for cash and will then most likely use that cash for luxury products, drugs, or other things. It’s fraud on a grand scale.

Our families are suffering. We don’t have big screen televisions or iPhones or Air Jordan’s because the government is talking too much of our money to give to the people who happily accept it and demand more and more of it.

This kind of socialist based robbery of the working class needs to stop.

When the government meets 100% of a “poor person’s” basic needs by taxing and punishing the working class, the poor live like kings because every dollar they earn for themselves can be spent on luxuries, since their basic needs are already paid for.

Which politicians are going to stop it?

Do a majority of African Americans and Hispanics support Donald Trump?

The December 9, 2015 MSNBC BING Snap Poll Results shown in the video clip below, show more than 75% of Americans favor Trump’s temporary immigration halt on muslims. In fact, Donald Trump’s most ardent supporters were from the African American and Hispanic socio-demographic groups, not whites, as the leftist media constantly tries to tell us.

Donald Trump uses big data analytics to analyze social media reactions and has repeatedly told both the press and his supporters that all this data shows large a majority of Americans are in favor of what he says and that is why he will win the presidency. (This is exactly why he does so much on social media, so he can measure the number of people that favor him).

Both MSNBC and BING refuse to deny the validity of the data shown in this MSNBC Snap Poll, BUT both removed it from their website. We believe this was done because this data does not match the message that MSNBC is trying to push out which is Trump’s opinins are crazy and he has no supporters except for crazy white males. This Snap Poll proves MSNBC’s narrive completely false.

In case you didn’t watch MSNBC on December 9, 2015, the only way you can get the video clip if you are not an MSNBC or Bing employee is to have recorded it live and saved it to a file outside of the control of both Bing and MSNBC like we did.

This information validates Donald Trump’s claims that the big data analytics are showing him that a vast majority of americans are on his side lead by African Americans and Hispanics and that the media is lying as it alwyas does since the american media has had close ties to the democratic party for many years.

You won’t find MSNBC and Bing issuing a statement saying this snap poll never happened because it did happen so MSNBC and Bing can’t deny it, nor can they deny the result because everyone who watched MSNBC on December 9, 2015 knows it.

Truth is liberating for only with truth can there be true freedom.

Don’t believe what the media is saying about Donald Trump because the facts show otherwise.

Lies Matter

News Flash (See Article from The Blaze)

  • Black woman gets pulled over for running a stop sign by white male police officer.
  • The fine for running a stop sign is $86 payable to the court either electronically or by certified check and 3 points against your driving record.
  • Police officer checks her drivers license and criminal background and determines that she has violated the law regarding not updating her drivers license with the current address.
  • The fine for not updating your drivers license to reflect your current address within 90 days of an address change is $28 payable to the court either electronically or by certified check.
  • The police officer should have issued a citation for both violations.
  • However he only cited her for the drivers license address violation, and completely ignored every other violation because most cops are nice if they are not behind on their department mandated citation quota.
  • She was shown mercy and kindness. The onboard dash cam captured everything regarding to the interaction between the two.
  • The woman decides she is going to report the police officer for drawing a gun and threatening to kill her.
  • She filled out a police report and certified that she was telling the truth.
  • The police Sargent (boss of the officer) pulls the dash cam video data, and checks the police officer’s computer search logs. The evidence found that the police officer actually did not issue the required citations but choose instead to show mercy by only issuing a citation for the address problem. The dash cam showed nothing but a cordial conversation from start to finish, no gun was drawn, and only a single citation was issued. The video even shows the woman appearing to be happy that she was shown mercy and only given the smaller less serious citation for the address problem. She was never cited for running the stop sign.
  • The woman was arrested and is now charged with the very serious crime of filing a false police report.
  • Imagine if there was no dash cam video.

With that background, try this on for size.

The Crux of the Matter

I bet that women honestly believes her own lies. When people have a sick psychological need to be the victim, the same sickness is also capable of enabling them to believe their own lies.

I’d like to see the result of a lie detector test on this woman. I honestly think she believes her own lie. I just need proof of it to be certain. A lie detector test would provide that proof.

Can you imagine what we are dealing with if these people actually believe, in the deepest depths of their hearts, that their own lies are true? If that is the situation in which we as a nation find ourselves, then we are dealing with a whole different problem that is much worse than anyone can possibly imagine.

I bet she would pass a lie detector test with flying colors if one were administered. There have been numerous indicators over the past year, exposing that this is for real.

The first major indicator was with “hands up don’t shoot”, and there have been others. I would bet that the original person who made up the original lie in each of those situations, actually believed their own lie, and convinced their own mind that it happened, even though it did not. It is one thing for a group to hear something, and then believe it at the group level.

However, I think these are individuals who believe the lies at the individual level, which is very frightening, because that means truth, evidence, and reality does not affect them. They are prisoners to their own fantasies which makes them dangerous people.

How long will it take a majority in American to realize that these people believe their own lies?

Once that realization happens, what can be done about these people who are “gone” and cannot “process reality”?

Allowing these dangerous people to interact with society means that all of our lives are being put at risk.